Between questions of health, nutrition, sports and a fridge breaking down on me, in the last few days my attention has constantly been diverted away from the good stuff, which is KotC 2 development.

Nevertheless, here is the promised update with lots of new screenshots and new design pages for your consumption.

Regarding combat, as I mentioned recently, I have finally implemented the most basic actions: moving in combat, taking a five-foot step, ending one's turn, delaying, standard attack, full attack, charge attack and attack of opportunity.

My plan is to continue implementing combat actions one by one, fixing bugs as I go. Today, while preparing this update, I harvested a good number of fresh bugs that I will have to correct first.

After that, I will focus on ranged attacks, opening the inventory in combat, grapple, bull rush, the other combat manoeuvers, the basic spells, ready versus spell, ready to counterspell, using a magic item in combat, using a class or racial power in combat, and using a spell-like ability. Spells, their interface and their graphical implementation will of course be a big part of the job. Afterwards comes the artificial intelligence.

In the following pictures, you can see the combat engine in action. We will review some of their details below. Click on a picture to enlarge it.

Combat Engine Pictures

Picture 92: A critical hit from a Balor, inflicting 57 points of damage. I am simply reusing the blood-splash icon from KotC 1.Picture 93: The party exploring the Temple of Chromatic Evil (that might not be the final name, haha).Picture 94: Okay, here, we have the big battle I prepared for this update. Basically it's a bunch of goblins plus one gargantuan hydra. On the picture, you can see a blue arrow below the acting character. That means the character is going to take a five-foot step before attacking. Just like KotC, the interface will automatically try to offer the best solution (charge attack, single move + standard attack, or five-foot step + full attack). In the top-left corner, we have the Combat Actions menu. The menu is automatically updated according to what the character can do at any one time. For example, it will only show Grapple and Bull Rush when enemies are adjacent to the character.

Picture 95: A goblin gets an attack of opportunity and deals two points of damage to the acting character.Picture 96: A goblin gets an attack of opportunity and misses. The animation is the same as in KotC - the attacker simply moves a bit towards the target when attacking. The sound effects are the same as in KotC.Picture 97: The half-giant Eukath attacks a goblin and deals 10 points of damage.

Picture 98: Taking a move action would trigger an attack of opportunity from the hydra. In this picture, the hydra has reach 10 (two squares), because I forgot to increase it. But a gargantuan creature will normally have a reach of 20 (four squares). I talk about Reach in more detail in the web page about Weapon Groups.Picture 99: The interface for taking a five-foot step.

Picture 101: This shows a path that is too long for the character to take.Picture 102: Kobolds have two claw attacks, as well as a bite attack.Picture 103: Interface showing Grapple.

Picture 110 and 111: Temple exploration. The fog of war looks smoother than in KotC 1.Picture 112: Creating the enemy group in the editor.

Picture 89: This picture shows the buttons that can be clicked to level up your characters, at the top-right of the screen.Pictures 90 and 91: Here you can see the modified character screen. It was expanded based on advice from Tiavals (Thanks, Tiavals).

New Subraces, new Classes, Skills

Now let's talk a bit about design stuff. I've been thinking that it would not be too hard to create subraces, so I created the design for a whole lot of them, as well as the new Half-Salamander race. You can read about subraces and races in the associated web pages. The Subrace page is brand new. It also provides class recommendations for each subrace.

I have also been designing eight new classes. Most of them are hybrid classes - I did not want to create new spell books or spell systems.

A proper class illustration will be created for each new class. On that subject, I have finally uploaded to the web pages the new class illustrations from the graphic designer Roman. The illustrations include a brand new one for the Ranger, as Roman wanted to create a picture of a higher quality than the previous one.

The new classes are the following (click on the class name to open the corresponding Class web page):

Samurai - a high-BAB combatant, master of the single-sword styleGladiator - a high-BAB combatant with blinding strike and wide weapon knowledgeBishop - a medium-BAB cleric benefiting from additional domain powersWarlock - a low-BAB wizard who can also use psionic powersPsychic Healer - a low-BAB psionicist who can also use cleric spellsChampion - a high-BAB combatant who has access to cleric spellsMage Knight - a high-BAB combatant who has access to wizard spellsStorm Warrior - a high-BAB combatant who has access to druid spells

Please see the associated web pages for more information. These pages are brand new. You can also use the updated KotC 2 title page to navigate between those pages.

I have also created a new page for character Skills. That page also includes information about characters advancing beyond level 20, and subrace suggestions for each character class. Note that each race also has a specific skill mentioned in the page about Races.

Another new page is the one for Weapon Enchantments. There are some new things there, like Giant Sized, Knockback and Exit Wound. Plus you will find some information about crafting.

I wanted to create some extra pages, like one for potions and potion mixing, one for showcasing the world map, one for celestial moon lore and one for showcasing screenshots, but I have not had enough time to do them yet. Also wanted to add the KotC 2 logo, didn't have the time.

New class features

Now let's talk a bit about new class features.

It has dawned on me that the Wizard and Druid could be a lot cooler if they had a chance to adopt a strong specialisation at level 1. So here you go: I have updated the pages for Wizard and Druid with new specialisation options. The Wizard specialises by choosing his celestial-body attunement, thus becoming a Red Wizard, Green Wizard, Blue Wizard, White Wizard or Black Wizard. He can also choose to be a generalist Wizard.

By taking the feats corresponding to his specialisation, the Red Wizard can benefit from a reduced cost for empowering and maximising damage spells. Each specialist Wizard gets good benefits by taking specialist feats.

Similarly, the Druid specialises by choosing his elemental sphere, thus becoming a Fire Druid, Earth Druid, Air Druid or Water Druid. He can also choose to be a generalist Druid.

Each sphere provides a number of benefits. The Druid does not need to take specific feats.

Hybrid classes will not have access to these specialisation options, thus giving more appeal to the base class.

I have also created and tweaked many cleric domains to make the Cleric even more interesting. For example, with the Flux domain, you cast cure and inflict spells as if they were close-range spells, rather than touch-range spells. With the Devastation domain, your inflict spells are maximised for free. With the Restoration domain, you cast cure spells using a move action rather than a standard action.

Finally, a word about the initiative order of magic effects. The D&D 3.5 system is quite complicated if you think about it. Whenever an effect is applied on someone, you need to keep track of its elapsed duration from the moment it was applied, so that you will know when the effect has expired and must be removed.

KotC 1 did not really bother about this. Effects on a character had a number of rounds and this number was reduced whenever the character took his turn. This is simpler but it does mean that an effect could be over very quickly if the character took his turn soon after receiving the effect, or the effect could last longer if the character took his turn long after receiving the effect.

So in KotC 2, we now try to get closer to the original rules. Each effect has its own initiative order and the remaining number of rounds is reduced only when the order in the initiative is reached. It's fairer but more complicated.

Even terrain effects will need to have their own initiative order. In effect, they will have to be treated as additional combatants in the initiative list, though this process will be invisible to the player.

That's it for now! As you can see, much more needs to be done, but the game is taking shape slowly. Thanks for reading and please post some feedback!

Combat Engine, New Subraces, New Classes, New Class Features

Truly an excellent, very meaty update---I especially got a chuckle out of the plan for high level/leveling with gold for training as that is a seldom done approach(Might & Magic 1 comes to mind on the cRPG side), but one that should work out well indeed for KotC sensibilities on top of tightly integrating with the fantasy economic realities where the wheels tend to fall off all too easily with the slightest inclination or will pursuant of that timeless noble endeavor. Also opens itself up rather nicely for explicit Quests of Advancement to become a thing especially for perhaps higher levels to bend the rules a bit.

Definitely liking the looks of the specialization flavour options for Mages and Druids to get parity with the Clerical Domains---I'm tempted to request completing the circle via showing some comparable new styling to Psionics...though I suppose the feats and relevant new hybrid classes as they now stand generally accomplish about as much considering the other thematic aspect they bear moreso than the others is that "flexibility" of mind. Besides, all of them could easily serve as good plot hooks for questing by, and for, the various higher powers and such.

Very nice on the bolstered Turning potential for the Bishop---though one can't but hope for there to be something somehow for the magical beasts and Oozes as they would seem a better fit compared to the few other types that are ultimately safe from even the highest version of it. Heh, some sort of mini-Turning equivalent for Druids to Rebuke Oozes and Mages to ___ magical beasts?

The only thing that sticks out at a glance is the Toughbone sub-race---+5 HP at character creation seems a bit mild in the grand scheme of things compared to the effects that most other sub-race choices have across the entire swath of species, doubly so with the -2 Ability points. It would be another matter if that +5 factored into the HP rolls gained on leveling or went another direction and added a DR 1/- perhaps with some further occasional racial scaling. Toughbone as an enduring existence, rather than just a very one-off mundane birth quirk.

The initiative changes generally sound like they'll be easy enough to acclimate once things get that far developed and "felt" as far as the overall flow of the game goes for both the environ, players, and foes.

Keep up the good work and keep that fridge safe---much of the world over, you'll definitely be needing that thing in good shape right about now and the months to come!

Here's my thoughts on the things in roughly the same order as your update. I may have rambled a bit too much on some of the issues, but overall I hope it's cohesive enough to understand:

UI and automation:

Automatically giving the best option is good, saves a lot of hassle if you don't have to five-foot-step before full attacking a nearby enemy. Never even noticed it was a thing, so it must've worked perfectly in KOTC1.

Not sure how I feel about the Combat Actions menu that only shows those actions that you can use at that moment. I'd prefer to see the whole list, with the ones that I can't use being grayed out. This'll remind me of my tactical choices and help me plan, since if I remember I can bullrush an enemy due to seeing the grayed out option, it will occur to me more easily to use it. Of course, depending on how large the list would be, it might be better to pare it down instead of graying it out since if it clutters too much of the screen, then it's just in the way.

I'd prefer if it was possible to see in one glance what the status of the enemy is. For instance, if the enemy is flatfooted, surprised, paralyzed, and such. You could add little icons or letters to the enemy characters on the map to signify it. Like, for flatfooted enemies a small F in their icon, so you know why they aren't able to make attacks of opportunity on you, or maybe yellowed ring around the icon if the enemy is surprised, or stuff like that. Of course, this can lead to cluttering since with so many different effects in the game that can be active at the same time, I'd expect to see 5 different letters on an enemy, which of course makes it so cluttered that it'll be hard to get the most important effect. I suppose the mouse overlay popup is good enough, since you don't really need to know the effects on other enemies except your target, after all, and if you can just mouse over them to see everything, it's probably for the best that way. Still, something to keep in mind.

The updated character sheet looks great, if I say so myself. Pretty much all of the necessary info you'd ever want to see in one glance is available, so you don't need to change the pages unless you have specific needs. Good job.

New stuff:

I really, really like the sub-race system. Adds a great deal of depth to the race system, with so little complexity.

Likewise, the new classes are quite nice conceptually, although balance-wise they seem a bit off to me.

The Samurai seems too good, depending on how the Samurai Sword Style thing works. If you get an automatic enchantment bonus, you can use a magic weapon with good abilities but a low enchantment score to it, pretty much making you far better compared to a fighter. It becomes especially crazy at high levels, where you have probably been able to craft a weapon of your liking, assuming the standard limit of 10 points worth enchantments exists. Suppose a +1 sword that is Force and Vorpal, then in the hands of a Samurai of level 20 it's a +8 sword that is Force and Vorpal. Pretty crazy if that's how it works. If it works in a different way, it'd be interesting to know how exactly. A fighter of the same level can't really compete with that in any way, I think. Though I suppose the point of the fighter is that he can do many different things well, and the Samurai focuses all his power on incredible attack power. Still, it seems to me the Samurai is a bit too good, but we'll see if others disagree.

The Gladiator seems much more reasonable. While the AC bonus does reach incredible levels in the end, it requires a high dexterity to truly benefit from it. A fighter can expect to be wearing a Full plate for 9 AC, with two feats to increase the Dex maximum for 11 effectual AC. A gladiator at level 20 has 12 AC (assuming Brigandine armor) with a potential of up to 5 more from dexterity so up to 17. So assuming things are fairly normal, at level 20 the Gladiator has something around 6 more AC than a fighter. Pretty nice, but not obviously superior since the fighter gets so many feats and the potential for greater damage, even taking into account the ability bonuses and bonus feats the gladiator gets. Thus, I feel the gladiator is a pretty good additional class.

The Bishop seems a bit weak to me, as does the other clerical class, namely the Champion. Their spell progression is almost the same, the main differences being that the Champion is full BAB(though worse saves), but the Bishop gets a lot of domains and can turn a larger variety of enemies. What type of damage is turning damage? Raw? So Turning a red dragon causes pure damage to it, no matter what? It's pretty reasonable, I suppose. Still, both of them feel too weak compared to cleric, since they don't get access to the high level spells that are the ones that actually matter the most. Having access to more domains doesn't compensate for having better(and more) spells, in my opinion, even with the better Turning. And a Paladin is in my opinion pretty much better than a Champion, since it gets many unique benefits that are quite powerful(Smite evil, Holy Sword spell, etc). Well, I suppose the Champion does give you access to many clerical spells you'd never have as a Paladin, but I'm hard pressed to choose a Champion over a Cleric or a Paladin. The Bishop at least has unique benefits that those other two don't have.

The Mage Knight is perhaps even worse. While the ability to potentially cast spells while wearing full armor is great, and having a wizard that has full BAB is likewise very nice, the problem is that you're sacrificing so many spells, but to gain what? The ability to be a poor man's fighter. A wizard is likely going to cast spells every round, so being a good warrior doesn't sound too great, and most of the wizard's self only buffs are too high level to cast as a Mage Knight. Of course, if the game is designed more around long term dungeoneering with little resting, then the Mage Knight becomes far more valuable as it has a great deal more long term sustainability than the wizard, who is useless after his spells are gone(unless he has wands). I suppose in that regard the Mage Knight is a reasonable addition to the game. Still, why not just use a fighter, if fighting is what you want to your party? The wizard's spells are offensive in nature, so your party doesn't really need a wizard, unlike a cleric or the like that is essential for healing and helping your party in other ways. I'm quite interested in hearing what opinions everyone else has on this, since I may have overlooked some important things.

On the other end of the scale, the Warlock and the Psychic Healer seem incredibly overpowered. They are better even than the Sorcerer, since their Spells Per Day and Power Points are separate, while the Sorcerer uses the same pool for his wizard and cleric spells. Sure, they have around half the power points of a Psionicist, but the other spell list easily compensates for it. Their psionics and spells drawing from separate pools means they'll be using their spells and psi far longer than a pure Psionicist or a Wizard ever could, and the added variabilty of a single character having access to loads of different support spells is great, not to mention the potential for laughably powerful combinations, such as Transformation or Divine Power combined with some of the better Psi powers. Not sure how to make them less amazing, though. Limiting their spell and power advancement to 7 might create the same problems that I feel the Mage Knight, Bishop and Champion have. Again, interesting to see other opinions on the matter.

I don't feel the Storm Warrior is as bad as Mage Knight or Champion, since it gets some pretty nice feats, the Storm Weapon feats especially seem to compensate for the problems I feel the other two classes have. Also, the Shillelagh spell works so well with the class it makes me grin. A half-giant with a Giant Sized club that he casts Shillelagh on becomes Colossal and does 4d6 damage. Quite humorous in my opinion, and quite competitive with the damage a fighter can deal. The other two classes don't have self-buffs of similar utility, I feel.

The skill system is looking very good. Simple, yet robust. I like it.

The new crafting system is great as well. The requirement for gems is a very good solution to the problem it previously had, since it limits your crafting a great deal, yet allows you to craft a few of your favourite items. Maybe not for all of your characters, but just those few that you really want and can't live without. The rest of your party will rely on found loot, thus making it quite rewarding when you find a cool new magic item, yet still allowing you to make your well-planned builds relying on a specific weapon, for instance. Thumbs up for that.

The amount of different weapon enchantments is almost too much now. While choice is good, it only has a point so long as the choices are fairly equal, and balancing such a large list of wildly different abilities can be hard. Or easy, I suppose, since they are wildly different after all, so they're used in pretty specific situations and don't overlap that much.

I love the Druid and Wizard specialization choices. They add a nice charm to the classes.

I especially got a chuckle out of the plan for high level/leveling with gold for training

Ahah, yes, you don't see a gold cost for advancement in many RPGs. My source of inspiration here was Bard's Tale 1 and 2. In the early levels, money was so tight in those games! You would spend your gold on healing, on advancing and on buying armour. Whenever you had collected enough XP to advance your characters, there was always the question 'right, good, but do I have enough gold?'. See, it creates a new opportunity for strategic choice. 'I have only 1,500 gold now, so do I level-up my Wizard, or my Cleric, or my Fighter? or do I forgo level-up and instead buy a magic healing wand?'.

The only thing that sticks out at a glance is the Toughbone sub-race

Right, right, I did hesitate a lot on that one. Thing is, I don't want it to be so bad that one could not want to play one, and I don't want it to be so good that it would always be chosen over the default race. -2 to the ability score total is not a very heavy price to pay for a half-giant, if those points only reduce Intelligence, Wisdom or Charisma. At the same time, replacing the front-loaded +5 HP with a +1 HP per level would not make much sense as it would be like giving a +2 to constitution, while at the same time taking away two points (which could also be constitution). Also, if there was a bonus to damage reduction, I think I would always pick the Toughbone over the Strongfist. For the time being, I have changed the Subraces chart, it now mentions '+8 Hit Points' as the racial bonus. I think +8 at level 1 is a really good bonus in exchange for (maybe) a -1 on Dex and -1 on Cha. It would really help the character survive at low levels.

if I remember I can bullrush an enemy due to seeing the grayed out option, it will occur to me more easily to use it

I get your point but it's probably the case that if your character is good at bull rush he will already be fighting with adjacent enemies, and so the option will be displayed anyway. Whereas, a Wizard or Ranger don't really need to know that the possibility is there for them to do a bull rush provided that they move close to the enemy.

I'd prefer if it was possible to see in one glance what the status of the enemy is. For instance, if the enemy is flatfooted, surprised, paralyzed, and such. You could add little icons or letters to the enemy characters on the map to signify it.

That's right. I have been planning for a long time to add such icons for conditions like Prone and whatnot. The icons are 8x8 pixels and I will probably display them at the bottom of each creature token. Totally agree that it's important to know at a glance who is paralysed, who is stuck, who is blinded, who is prone, who is hasted, who is slowed, who is stunned, who is dominated, etc. I liked the special effects in KotC 1 for paralysis and stun but I don't think I will be able to reproduce them here. In KotC 2, mousing over an effect icon will provide info about the moused-over condition (name, remaining number of rounds, caster level).

Suppose a +1 sword that is Force and Vorpal, then in the hands of a Samurai of level 20 it's a +8 sword that is Force and Vorpal. Pretty crazy if that's how it works.

You have understood the concept correctly. The Fighter could get something rather similar if a Cleric casts Greater Enhance Weapon on him. He would then get +5 even though the weapon may only be +1. Anyway, I don't think that the Samurai and Fighter must have the same raw power level at level 20. Also, at level 20, it's usually a very good idea to use two magic weapons, as a Fighter with Superior Two-Weapon Fighting. Because of this, it's possible that your dual-wielding Fighter would still be more devastating than your focused Samurai. Finally, I've just added the feat 'Wade In' to the Fighter's list, please have a read and you might well reconsider your opinion of the Fighter. There are a few other feats I want to add to certain classes, I just haven't had the time to update the pages yet.

The Bishop seems a bit weak to me,

It sounds amazing to me that you would say that, because I love the Bishop and actually I have a hard time deciding whether the Bishop is superior to the Cleric or not. For example, I can envision two kinds of Bishops, one focusing more on martial stuff, and one focusing more on cure and inflict. The one focusing on martial stuff could get domains like Smite, Strength, War, Metal, Protection, Luck, Hunting, Tactics, Travel, Blood, Death... And the one focusing on cure, inflict, heal and harm could get Restoration, Rejuvenation, Wilting, Destruction, Devastation, Flux, Life, Healing, Reach... Really, the possibilities are endless. In exchange for this, you sacrifice the level-8 and level-9 spells. Essentially, it means you can't cast Mass Heal and Mass Harm. Sure, it's a high cost, but it's a great benefit too. Sounds fair to me.

a Paladin is in my opinion pretty much better than a Champion

Well, the Paladin does get better special abilities, but the Champion gets many more spells and many more spell slots than the Paladin (as well as a few nifty unique feats). That being said, one of the reasons for me creating the Champion is that Paladin is restricted to Lawful Good and I felt that this was a bit too restrictive. So now, any alignment can have their Champion. Flavour-wise, it will be good for evil deities to have their own Champions, Bishops and Clerics. Also, if you want to play a party that is not Lawful Good, you might like the Champion.

The Mage Knight is perhaps even worse.

Well, I can't really disagree with you on the Mage Knight. But the Fighter/Mage is a rather popular D&D concept, so I felt that the game would benefit from it. I guess it's more a question of: 'do I take a Barbarian, or do I go the hybrid route and take a Mage Knight instead?'. Maybe you want everyone in your party to be able to cast spells, because you think that a class that does not have access to spells is too severely limited at higher levels. For me, taking a Mage Knight is like taking a Fighter, but with an option to cast Fireball and Haste from level 7, in addition to things like Grease or True Strike right from level 1. Also, as you say, having a guy like that in addition to your full caster would be a good idea when opportunities for resting are few and far between. But it remains a fact that, in order to get a high BAB and good weapon proficiencies, a Wizard must sacrifice a lot, because he starts from a low-BAB position.

the Warlock and the Psychic Healer seem incredibly overpowered

I do agree that their potential is amazing. However, every round, a character gets only a single standard action. Flexibility is great, but so is the ability to make that one standard action really matter. If you look at Mass Harm for example, a Cleric will always have more available castings and a higher DC than any of the hybrid Cleric classes, including the Sorcerer and Psychic Healer. Not only does the Cleric get more spell slots of spell level 9, he can also concentrate on a single ability score, Wisdom, which controls everything related to spells: DC and bonus spell slots. By contrast, the Sorcerer and Psychic Healer have to divide their ability points between Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma.

Likewise, if you compare the Warlock to the Wizard. It seems to me that a Red Wizard, Green Wizard or Blue Wizard can be insanely powerful. On a single standard action, a Red Wizard can very cheaply cast Maximised Fireball. He can cast Acid Blast cheaply. He gets lots of high-level spell slots and a high DC by focusing on a single ability score. A Green Wizard can cast Greater Enhance Weapon and Haste with a move action. He can cast Greater Disintegrate as a level-8 spell. The Blue Wizard can cast Irresistible Dance without touching the target. He can cast Dominate Monster as a level-8 spell. Sure, the Warlock also has access to psionics. But many psionics are redundant with Wizard spells. One big advantage of the Warlock, as I see it, is that he can convert the energy type of Wizard spells. And you are right that he may be able to use spells and psionics for longer than a Wizard would, in a situation where resting is scarce.

It all depends on how much power the Warlock chooses to spend. If he keeps using level-9 powers, he will burn 17 PP every round, allowing him to do this only 10 times at level 20, before burning through his PP pool completely. Then he only has two spell slots of Wizard spell level 9. Meanwhile, a level-20 Psionicist would have 343 PP plus a large PP bonus due to the concentration on a single ability score, Intelligence. Let's say he has Intelligence 24, that gives him 70 bonus PP. His pool is equal to 413 PP, allowing him to use level-9 powers 24 times before burning through the PP pool completely. So if we look only at the sheer number of high-level castings/activations, the psionicist seems to be the one that gives the best deal, and not necessarily the Warlock.

So, yeah. I just think the balance may be okay. I also think that the most important thing may not be the difference in power at level 20, but maybe at level 5 or 7. It's a pretty big disadvantage for the Warlock not to have access to level-3 Wizard spells as early as the Wizard. Likewise, the Warlock gains access to level-9 Wizard spells only by level 19, while the Wizard was having access to them from level 17. The Warlock, Psychic Healer and Sorcerer develop more slowly than non-hybrid casters, but, in exchange, when they reach level 20, they may have attained a greater level of raw power.

A half-giant with a Giant Sized club that he casts Shillelagh on becomes Colossal and does 4d6 damage.

Yeah, nice idea, you could do something like that with good effect. A half-giant Storm Warrior would have a pretty strong focus on melee fighting, considering his Wisdom would not be very high, but that's okay. Storm Warrior is another class like the Mage Knight, it is a class for someone who wants a melee combatant but who also thinks that using a class without spells would be too limiting.

'Say there is a chunk of meat. Pirates will have a banquet and eat it! But heroes will share it with other people. I want all the meat!!' - Luffy in One Piece

It does look pretty good, actually. A fine standard for the art in the game.

if I remember I can bullrush an enemy due to seeing the grayed out option, it will occur to me more easily to use it

I get your point but it's probably the case that if your character is good at bull rush he will already be fighting with adjacent enemies, and so the option will be displayed anyway. Whereas, a Wizard or Ranger don't really need to know that the possibility is there for them to do a bull rush provided that they move close to the enemy.

Hmm, that's true enough, I suppose.

I'd prefer if it was possible to see in one glance what the status of the enemy is. For instance, if the enemy is flatfooted, surprised, paralyzed, and such. You could add little icons or letters to the enemy characters on the map to signify it.

That's right. I have been planning for a long time to add such icons for conditions like Prone and whatnot. The icons are 8x8 pixels and I will probably display them at the bottom of each creature token. Totally agree that it's important to know at a glance who is paralysed, who is stuck, who is blinded, who is prone, who is hasted, who is slowed, who is stunned, who is dominated, etc. I liked the special effects in KotC 1 for paralysis and stun but I don't think I will be able to reproduce them here. In KotC 2, mousing over an effect icon will provide info about the moused-over condition (name, remaining number of rounds, caster level).

Sounds great.

Suppose a +1 sword that is Force and Vorpal, then in the hands of a Samurai of level 20 it's a +8 sword that is Force and Vorpal. Pretty crazy if that's how it works.

You have understood the concept correctly. The Fighter could get something rather similar if a Cleric casts Greater Enhance Weapon on him. He would then get +5 even though the weapon may only be +1. Anyway, I don't think that the Samurai and Fighter must have the same raw power level at level 20. Also, at level 20, it's usually a very good idea to use two magic weapons, as a Fighter with Superior Two-Weapon Fighting. Because of this, it's possible that your dual-wielding Fighter would still be more devastating than your focused Samurai. Finally, I've just added the feat 'Wade In' to the Fighter's list, please have a read and you might well reconsider your opinion of the Fighter. There are a few other feats I want to add to certain classes, I just haven't had the time to update the pages yet.

I suppose that is true, but since Greater Enhance Weapon has to be cast in the combat(duration until end of combat), it's one action wasted from a cleric. Combat in D&D tends to be very short in rounds, at least in normal circumstances, perhaps 5-8 rounds, so a single round wasted is a big deal. It's true that they don't need to have the same raw power at level 20, I just have the bad habit of always thinking about things in their most optimal state, which means level 20 in D&D. Comparing the classes only at that level is a bit shortsighted, I admit. The fighter does have an advantage until level 12 or so, but after that Samurai starts getting a lot stronger while the fighter probably won't ever get anything that adds raw power anymore, only the breadth of his tactics. I didn't think of two-weapon fighting either, so you're correct in that, especially since Fighter will have plenty of feats to spare.The "Wade In" feat seems extremely powerful later on. Sort of makes some of the charge feats the fighter can get useless, but then the Fighter has feats to spare so it's not a problem, I suppose. You've convinced me the Samurai isn't a problem balance wise. I really have to start thinking about these things in a more broad manner.

The Bishop seems a bit weak to me,

It sounds amazing to me that you would say that, because I love the Bishop and actually I have a hard time deciding whether the Bishop is superior to the Cleric or not. For example, I can envision two kinds of Bishops, one focusing more on martial stuff, and one focusing more on cure and inflict. The one focusing on martial stuff could get domains like Smite, Strength, War, Metal, Protection, Luck, Hunting, Tactics, Travel, Blood, Death... And the one focusing on cure, inflict, heal and harm could get Restoration, Rejuvenation, Wilting, Destruction, Devastation, Flux, Life, Healing, Reach... Really, the possibilities are endless. In exchange for this, you sacrifice the level-8 and level-9 spells. Essentially, it means you can't cast Mass Cure and Mass Harm. Sure, it's a high cost, but it's a great benefit too. Sounds fair to me.

The idea of a martial bishop sounds interesting, didn't think of that. A lot of fun in the very least, if not power, since many of the domains are simply cool to use. I value Mass Heal, Mass Harm and Energy Drain a great deal. Besides Dominate Monster, the best spells in the game, at least with my playing style. But as with the Samurai, I didn't really think about how things are before level 20. For sure, the Bishop is quite good for a long time, and the cleric only starts getting better at level 17 when 9th level spells unlock. But when you do get those 9th level spells, the Cleric is quite a lot better in my opinion. Hard to say without playing, of course, since the practicality of the Domains is a bit clouded to me at the moment.

a Paladin is in my opinion pretty much better than a Champion

Well, the Paladin does get better special abilities, but the Champion gets many more spells and many more spell slots than the Paladin (as well as a few nifty unique feats). That being said, one of the reasons for me creating the Champion is that Paladin is restricted to Lawful Good and I felt that this was a bit too restrictive. So now, any alignment can have their Champion. Flavour-wise, it will be good for evil deities to have their own Champions, Bishops and Clerics. Also, if you want to play a party that is not Lawful Good, you might like the Champion.

Now that you've convinced me of the usefulness of the Bishop, particularly the martial variant, it's starting to look like it overshadows the Champion. I do agree that a non Lawful Good holy warrior is a nice class, still, I think something more is needed. After all, a Bishop with the proper Domains can be as good, if not more powerful, than a Champion. Not sure what would be a good addition both flavor and mechanics wise. A set of feats that allows you to have your weapons be Aligned to law-chaos-good-evil? Allowing you to choose one Domain? Why not two, even?

The Mage Knight is perhaps even worse.

Well, I can't really disagree with you on the Mage Knight. But the Fighter/Mage is a rather popular D&D concept, so I felt that the game would benefit from it. I guess it's more a question of: 'do I take a Barbarian, or do I go the hybrid route and take a Mage Knight instead?'. Maybe you want everyone in your party to be able to cast spells, because you think that a class that does not have access to spells is too severely limited at higher levels. For me, taking a Mage Knight is like taking a Fighter, but with an option to cast Fireball and Haste from level 7, in addition to things like Grease or True Strike right from level 1. Also, as you say, having a guy like that in addition to your full caster would be a good idea when opportunities for resting are few and far between. But it remains a fact that, in order to get a high BAB and good weapon proficiencies, a Wizard must sacrifice a lot, because he starts from a low-BAB position.

I get the point of the Mage Knight if otherwise you wouldn't have anyone who can cast Wizard spells in the party(so no warlock, sorcerer or wizard, or even rogue). A few wizard spells are quite critical as you said, Haste being one of them. Perhaps it is good enough from that point of view, it didn't occur to me since I assumed that of course I would have a proper arcane caster in the party. It's true that not all classes have to be equally good in ALL possible party variants.

the Warlock and the Psychic Healer seem incredibly overpowered

I do agree that their potential is amazing. However, every round, a character gets only a single standard action. Flexibility is great, but so is the ability to make that one standard action really matter. If you look at Mass Harm for example, a Cleric will always have more available castings and a higher DC than any of the hybrid Cleric classes, including the Sorcerer and Psychic Healer. Not only does the Cleric get more spell slots of spell level 9, he can also concentrate on a single ability score, Wisdom, which controls everything related to spells: DC and bonus spell slots. By contrast, the Sorcerer and Psychic Healer have to divide their ability points between Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma.

Likewise, if you compare the Warlock to the Wizard. It seems to me that a Red Wizard, Green Wizard or Blue Wizard can be insanely powerful. On a single standard action, a Red Wizard can very cheaply cast Maximised Fireball. He can cast Acid Blast cheaply. He gets lots of high-level spell slots and a high DC by focusing on a single ability score. A Green Wizard can cast Greater Enhance Weapon and Haste with a move action. He can cast Greater Disintegrate as a level-8 spell. The Blue Wizard can cast Irresistible Dance without touching the target. He can cast Dominate Monster as a level-8 spell. Sure, the Warlock also has access to psionics. But many psionics are redundant with Wizard spells. One big advantage of the Warlock, as I see it, is that he can convert the energy type of Wizard spells. And you are right that he may be able to use spells and psionics for longer than a Wizard would, in a situation where resting is scarce.

It all depends on how much power the Warlock chooses to spend. If he keeps using level-9 powers, he will burn 17 PP every round, allowing him to do this only 10 times at level 20, before burning through his PP pool completely. Then he only has two spell slots of Wizard spell level 9. Meanwhile, a level-20 Psionicist would have 343 PP plus a large PP bonus due to the concentration on a single ability score, Intelligence. Let's say he has Intelligence 24, that gives him 70 bonus PP. His pool is equal to 413 PP, allowing him to use level-9 powers 24 times before burning through the PP pool completely. So if we look only at the sheer number of high-level castings/activations, the psionicist seems to be the one that gives the best deal, and not necessarily the Warlock.

So, yeah. I just think the balance may be okay. I also think that the most important thing may not be the difference in power at level 20, but maybe at level 5 or 7. It's a pretty big disadvantage for the Warlock not to have access to level-3 Wizard spells as early as the Wizard. Likewise, the Warlock gains access to level-9 Wizard spells only by level 19, while the Wizard was having access to them from level 17. The Warlock, Psychic Healer and Sorcerer develop more slowly than non-hybrid casters, but, in exchange, when they reach level 20, they may have attained a greater level of raw power.

Now that wand crafting is so difficult, I think it's especially important to have staying-power in your party, and a Warlock will have just that. Sure, you might not be able to cast as potent spells, but you'll be happy to have more to use after a long dungeon crawl. I do see the point of a Warlock being less powerful compared to the actual caster classes, but I do like the ability to have both psionics and wizard spells at the same time, in case an enemy that is particularly immune to either appears, and such. Spell resistance and Power Resistance both exist, right? Or does Spell Resistance protect against Psionics too?Your point about the progression of power is true enough, as I've come to realize. It's easier to look at the stats at level twenty and compare them, than to feel how they'd be in the actual game itself.

Fair enough on the Toughbone, I'm just a sucker for Racially Interesting Things as an ongoing evocative, thematic affair whenever possible---could be a side effect of too much Dungeon Crawl: Stone Soup over the years where if the race isn't Demonspawn, Draconian, Gargoyle...or something else hewing heavily and thoroughly exotic: It just kind of deflates the intrigue and sense of progression interactions even aside from just gaining levels as a given class---plus yet more potential quest fodder along the existential and evolutionary lines.

I guess another approach to a Mage Knight would be Reduced Cost and/or Freely(Exclusively/Uniquely?) Empowered Mage Spells of the Buffing and such varieties---maybe even allowing some/all usually Self-Only ones to spread with another feat, with the balance coming from being outright ineligible for the usual Blasting Evocations and whatnot across all other Spell Schools that wouldn't encourage them taking their own, non-feat'd, crack at Wading Into The Fray?

since Greater Enhance Weapon has to be cast in the combat(duration until end of combat), it's one action wasted from a cleric.

Yes, that is true. That's the advantage of the Samurai: the enhancement effect is always on, regardless of the weapon he's using. Similarly, the Cleric could cast Divine Power or the Wizard could cast Transformation to get a full base attack bonus, but doing so would require them to spend a standard action, while combatant classes have their full BAB always on.

thinking about things in their most optimal state, which means level 20

It does make sense to compare them at level 20, but there are so many factors involved. Depending on what they are fighting: whether the enemy has high AC or low AC, high hit points or low hit points, high DR or low DR, energy resistances, high saves or low saves, whether there are many moderately strong enemies or a single powerful one... It can all affect the outcome of the question: what combatant class is most effective?

The "Wade In" feat seems extremely powerful later on. Sort of makes some of the charge feats the fighter can get useless

Good points. Though charge is slightly different. It allows you to move up to two times your speed, while Wade In allows you to move only one time your speed. A charge with the feat Two-Weapon Pounce only gets you one attack for each weapon you hold, while Wade In allows you to get your full-attack sequence with all iterative attacks. Finally, a charge with the feat Greater Charge gets you a +4 bonus to the attack roll, while Wade In does not provide any bonus. So, all in all, I would say that charge would still be useful. It would still be very useful for classes other than the fighter (who can't get access to Wade In, but have access to charge feats) and, for the fighter, it would be useful when the enemy is far away, or when you need an extra boost to the attack roll.

[Bishop] A lot of fun in the very least, if not power, since many of the domains are simply cool to use.

Exactly. There are so many interesting Cleric domains, so I think that justifies having a class like the Bishop. If my party already has someone with access to level-9 cleric spells (a Sorcerer, a Cleric or a Psychic Healer), then I would consider adding a Bishop. I like the idea of a Bishop (or Cleric) casting Maximised Empowered Inflict Critical Wounds every round.

when you do get those 9th level spells, the Cleric is quite a lot better in my opinion.

Yeah. That sounds fair to me. By level 20, I agree, the Cleric has an edge over the Bishop, due to Mass Heal, Mass Harm and Energy Drain. The Cleric only has two domains, but he can pick the two very best ones for his combat style. The Bishop does get Heal and Harm, which are also very powerful spells. And with the right domains (Rejuvenation and Wilting), he can cast them as level-5 spells, which would get him a whole lot of additional castings, that the Cleric would not have unless he picked exactly those domains.

you've convinced me of the usefulness of the Bishop, particularly the martial variant, it's starting to look like it overshadows the Champion.

Probably. I think I would prefer playing a Bishop rather than a Champion. But it all depends on the party make-up. If it's a bit lacking in raw melee power (meat shields), then a Champion is more appropriate.

A set of feats that allows you to have your weapons be Aligned to law-chaos-good-evil?

Very good idea. I will add a feat that allows the Champion to bypass aligned DR (his weapons will always be considered to be of the right alignment for the purpose of bypassing the enemy's DR) plus that feat will give him a bonus of +2 to damage rolls whenever using a weapon enchanted with Holy, Unholy, Axiomatic or Anarchic, against enemies of the opposed alignment. Great. Flavourful and unique.

Allowing you to choose one Domain? Why not two, even?

Sounds good, it's a really interesting idea, but I'm concerned that it would take away the coolness of the Bishop and Cleric and also make the Champion too good a proposition, compared to semi casters like the Ranger, Paladin, Rogue, Mage Knight, Bard, Storm Warrior and Psychic Warrior, who do not get so many abilities. Probably it's better not to give any domains to the Champion.

I get the point of the Mage Knight if otherwise you wouldn't have anyone who can cast Wizard spells in the party

Also, I will improve the Mage Knight a bit, through new feats and bonus feat picks. I'm thinking to give him bonus feats at levels 5, 8, 11, 14, 17 and 20 - quite like the Bard's bonus feats. Probably it's fair compared to a Storm Warrior and Champion because the Mage Knight gets fewer spell slots and his casting only goes up to level 6, not 7.

And for the new feats I'm thinking of the following:

* Improved Elemental Weapon: When fighting with a Flaming, Frost, Shocking or Acidic weapon (or a Burst version of these enchantments), the elemental damage increases by 1d6. Requires: Mage Knight level 5.

* Greater Elemental Weapon: When fighting with a Flaming, Frost, Shocking or Acidic weapon (or a Burst version of these enchantments), the elemental damage increases by another 1d6. Requires: Mage Knight level 11, Improved Elemental Weapon.

That way, the elemental-damage feats are similar to those of the Storm Warrior, but they are much more flexible for the Mage Knight. Do you think all those changes would be good for the Mage Knight?

Now that wand crafting is so difficult

Actually I'm not planning to allow wand crafting, only wand recharging. So you would have to find (or buy) a wand with the right spell on it.

Spell resistance and Power Resistance both exist, right? Or does Spell Resistance protect against Psionics too?

Spell Resistance will protect against spells, spell-like abilities and psionics.

I guess another approach to a Mage Knight would be Reduced Cost and/or Freely(Exclusively/Uniquely?) Empowered Mage Spells of the Buffing and such varieties

Well, it's a good idea. With the Mage Knight, I don't want to go into full-fledged Wizard specialisation territory, but your suggestion gave me the idea to create the two feats above about Enhance Ability spells cast by a Mage Knight. Cheers!

'Say there is a chunk of meat. Pirates will have a banquet and eat it! But heroes will share it with other people. I want all the meat!!' - Luffy in One Piece

BlueSalamander wrote:It does make sense to compare them at level 20, but there are so many factors involved. Depending on what they are fighting: whether the enemy has high AC or low AC, high hit points or low hit points, high DR or low DR, energy resistances, high saves or low saves, whether there are many moderately strong enemies or a single powerful one... It can all affect the outcome of the question: what combatant class is most effective?

True enough. For some reason I just tend to think about how to maximize damage to a single target.

Charge is slightly different. It allows you to move up to two times your speed, while Wade In allows you to move only one time your speed. A charge with the feat Two-Weapon Pounce only gets you one attack for each weapon you hold, while Wade In allows you to get your full-attack sequence with all iterative attacks. Finally, a charge with the feat Greater Charge gets you a +4 bonus to the attack roll, while Wade In does not provide any bonus. So, all in all, I would say that charge would still be useful. It would still be very useful for classes other than the fighter (who can't get access to Wade In, but have access to charge feats) and, for the fighter, it would be useful when the enemy is far away, or when you need an extra boost to the attack roll.

For some reason I forgot that Charge is twice your move, weird. Good points, too.

Probably. I think I would prefer playing a Bishop rather than a Champion. But it all depends on the party make-up. If it's a bit lacking in raw melee power (meat shields), then a Champion is more appropriate.

The Bishop is more interesting, that's for sure, but might not be as useful in certain parties. I suppose the Champion does have a place, in that regard, I just tend to like classes that have interesting powers that you can't get elsewhere, like multiple Domains.

I will add a feat that allows the Champion to bypass aligned DR (his weapons will always be considered to be of the right alignment for the purpose of bypassing the enemy's DR) plus that feat will give him a bonus of +2 to damage rolls whenever using a weapon enchanted with Holy, Unholy, Axiomatic or Anarchic, against enemies of the opposed alignment.

Seems like a very reasonable way to do it.

Also, I will improve the Mage Knight a bit, through new feats and bonus feat picks. I'm thinking to give him bonus feats at levels 5, 8, 11, 14, 17 and 20 - quite like the Bard's bonus feats. Probably it's fair compared to a Storm Warrior and Champion because the Mage Knight gets fewer spell slots and his casting only goes up to level 6, not 7.

And for the new feats I'm thinking of the following:

* Improved Elemental Weapon: When fighting with a Flaming, Frost, Shocking or Acidic weapon (or a Burst version of these enchantments), the elemental damage increases by 1d6. Requires: Mage Knight level 5.

* Greater Elemental Weapon: When fighting with a Flaming, Frost, Shocking or Acidic weapon (or a Burst version of these enchantments), the elemental damage increases by another 1d6. Requires: Mage Knight level 11, Improved Elemental Weapon.

That way, the elemental-damage feats are similar to those of the Storm Warrior, but they are much more flexible for the Mage Knight. Do you think all those changes would be good for the Mage Knight?

The added feats seem a good way to do it.

Greater Elemental Weapon seems a bit too powerful, though. On the other hand, I hardly ever use weapons with those properties, so I guess it's a nice way to make them useful. Then again, if you craft a weapon with all four elemental properties, it'll be laughably powerful, unless there was a restriction of only one elemental property per weapon? 8d6 extra damage is pretty harsh, even if it's often resisted by many late-game monsters.

it'll be laughably powerful, unless there was a restriction of only one elemental property per weapon?

Yes indeed, there is a restriction of only one elemental property per weapon. Still sounds pretty powerful, but I figure that every class should have its own strengths. And when the Mage Knight is doing physical attacks, he's not casting spells. So it can be quite a trade-off for the Mage Knight.

'Say there is a chunk of meat. Pirates will have a banquet and eat it! But heroes will share it with other people. I want all the meat!!' - Luffy in One Piece